Michael, thanks for all the clear info in the bugs by the way! I also got good results from running the tests under tmpfs - the 3.2 run was almost acceptably fast. But obviously it's not practical to require every machine running the tests to have a tmpfs mounted (or somehow mount one in the test run).
On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 10:36 AM Michael Hudson-Doyle < [email protected]> wrote: > On 18 May 2016 at 21:32, Christian Muirhead > <[email protected]> wrote: > > WiredTiger is *much* slower at creating and dropping indexes and > > collections. I haven't worked out why that is, other than doing some > > stracing and seeing that a lot of time is spent in fdatasync - I haven't > dug > > into the mongo source code. > > Yeah, this is what I concluded too. I tried running mongo under > eatmydata but it didn't work for reasons I didn't get around to > understanding. I even built a mongo with the fdatasync call commented > out but then I moved onto other things... > > Cheers, > mwh > > > There's a bit more detail in these bugs: > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1573294 > > https://jira.mongodb.org/browse/SERVER-21198 > > > > I've changed the tests so that instead of dropping and recreating > databases > > in teardown and setup we clear out all of the collections (except the > > transaction collections) between tests. Obviously that's worse from the > > perspective of test isolation, but it seems to work well - better than I > was > > expecting, to be honest. > > > > Cheers, > > Christian > > > > On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 9:58 AM roger peppe <[email protected]> > > wrote: > >> > >> Out of interest, what's causing the 3.2 slowdown and what's the hack to > >> speed it up again? > >> > >> On 18 May 2016 09:51, "Christian Muirhead" > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 2:04 AM David Cheney < > [email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> 100x more webscale > >>> > >>> Ha! > >>> > >>> I'm *just about* finished the hack to make the state tests on 3.2 run > in > >>> about the same time as on 2.4. On my machine the state tests take > 6m24s on > >>> 3.2 and the old version took 4m56s. Which is still worse, > unfortunately, but > >>> at least it isn't 100x worse. So if there are stability benefits to > running > >>> the tests on 3.2 it's still a win, I guess? > >>> > >>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 11:02 AM, Horacio Duran > >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > For now we are trying to go around mongo issues that make the tests > >>>> > 100x > >>>> > slower (yes one hundred) once this is fixed we should start using > >>>> > mongo 3.2 > >>>> > exclusively since 2.4 iirc is EOL or near. The issue lies in the new > >>>> > storage > >>>> > engine, which we could skip if mmapv1 ( the old one) wasn't also > >>>> > nearing EOL > >>>> > I am currently on the phone but if You want more details I can dig > up > >>>> > the > >>>> > bug with details of what I am talking about. > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > On Tuesday, 17 May 2016, David Cheney <[email protected]> > >>>> > wrote: > >>>> >> > >>>> >> What's the plan for mongo 3.2 ? Will we be required to support 2.x > >>>> >> versions for the foreseeable future, or is there a possibility to > >>>> >> make > >>>> >> it a build or run time failure if mongo < 3.2 is installed on the > >>>> >> host > >>>> >> ? > >>>> >> > >>>> >> On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 9:01 AM, Martin Packman > >>>> >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> >> > On 17/05/2016, Curtis Hovey-Canonical <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>>> >> >> > >>>> >> >> The juju-mongo2.6 package will be be preferred by juju 1.2.5 in > >>>> >> >> xenial > >>>> >> >> and without other changes, 2.4 will be used by all other 1.25 > >>>> >> >> series. > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> > This isn't yet true, there's a bug open for it: > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> > "Use juju-mongodb2.6 for 1.25 on xenial" > >>>> >> > < > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/juju-core/+bug/1570650> > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> > I had made the packaging change, but without juju code changes as > >>>> >> > well > >>>> >> > it just went and installed the old (2.4) juju-mongodb anyway when > >>>> >> > setting up a state server. > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> > Martin > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> > -- > >>>> >> > Juju-dev mailing list > >>>> >> > [email protected] > >>>> >> > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > >>>> >> > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev > >>>> >> > >>>> >> -- > >>>> >> Juju-dev mailing list > >>>> >> [email protected] > >>>> >> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > >>>> >> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Juju-dev mailing list > >>>> [email protected] > >>>> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > >>>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Juju-dev mailing list > >>> [email protected] > >>> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > >>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev > >>> > > > > -- > > Juju-dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev > > >
-- Juju-dev mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
